That car sounds simply amazing. If Ford made the interior nicer someday, I would buy one. I personally like the exterior and the performance is amazing but I can't get over the interior design. Maybe for a track car... no, that will be the new 911S

I love how everyone claims to have "driven" every other car they compare the M3 to and don't like as much... even ones not out yet It adds a lot of credibility to their argument as to why it isn't as good as the M3. Claims of having "driven" the other car on the internet are true maybe 50% of the time at most but it sure does make arguing a perspective easier when you have "experience" with both.

Yeah... I knew he hadn't. Just calling him out in a subtle way

Not sure if you're claiming I didn't drive the car or what. They have a lot full of them at Galpin in Van Nuys.

Oh and FYI, I'm not claiming to have driven a GT500 or anything, just a 13 GT.

Not sure if you're claiming I didn't drive the car or what. They have a lot full of them at Galpin in Van Nuys.

Oh and FYI, I'm not claiming to have driven a GT500 or anything, just a 13 GT.

Given the discussion, I thought you were referring to driving a '13 GT500.

In my opinion, the regular GT isn't comparable, even though it is very close performance wise, given the price difference. The '13 GT500 is close in price and will be a monster on any track. I presumed, incorrectly, that you were referring to that car. However, even the regular GT is comparable in performance to the M3/C63/RS4 and 5... maybe a tick behind... but very comparable for way less money. Granted, the inside is poorly done.

Given the discussion, I thought you were referring to driving a '13 GT500.

In my opinion, the regular GT isn't comparable, even though it is very close performance wise, given the price difference. The '13 GT500 is close in price and will be a monster on any track. I presumed, incorrectly, that you were referring to that car. However, even the regular GT is comparable in performance to the M3/C63/RS4 and 5... maybe a tick behind... but very comparable for way less money. Granted, the inside is poorly done.

Name of the thread was simply 2013 Mustang. GT500 isn't even mentioned until after my first post in the thread.

I was just stating that I test drove the new car. It's exterior is the best thing going for it besides the price. No doubt a GT500 will be more than we can handle. I still couldn't bring myself to own one.

Does anyone care about styling and design... or is performance the bottom line..the car still looks lunky and unsure of itself and the lines suck..even if performance has been boosted..I was really hoping for a body style change. I would only do a Shelby anyways..to SehrSchnell's point

Just from an asthetic pov..comparing it to this 1968 classic I doubt I will own a new one anytime soon..Ford just hasnt recaptured the magic of this car,,imo.

I think the current GT500's and 2013 is one of the best looking cars on the market. Very muscular, very sleek and very sexy at the same time. Totally retro, but not in the lame way like the bloated/ugly Camaro

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

The interior is very low rent, but according to Motor Trend, a 2011 Mustang GT completed a lap (at Willow Springs, I think) less than a tenth of a second behind a competition-package M3, with a pro driver handling both cars. With a magazine type behind the wheel, the Mustang was a half-second quicker than the bimmer. With the Brembo Pakage or, even better, the new-for-'13 Track Pack, you're not going to run out of brakes within four or five laps, either.

Combine that with similar quarter-mile performance and you've certainly got to give some props to the Ford. Yup, they absolutely play in different leagues and are not competitors, but that Ford is the first one in a long time that has me interested.

Bruce

PS - My military son just traded his track car (2009 GTI) in on a Boss 302 LS, and my God, that thing is fast. He's been tracking it down in Texas and says (with respect) that M3s are just no problem at all. In fact, it's only breathed-on Porsches and exotics that can consistently get around him.

For me, the most impressive* thing about that car is that Ford actually specs different tires for the right rear and left rear - with differing prices.

Unbelieveable! I am torn between thinking "WTF WERE YOU GUYS THINKING?!!", or perhaps just saluting.

Again, props to Ford.

I agree on props to Ford (hell I might pursue a 302 in the future) but let's not forget...

5.0's are putting down anywhere from 375-395rwhp/360 torque
While Boss 302's have put down 410-415/355
Compared to an M3 340/250 range all on dynojet's.

These Coyote's have huge power/torque advantage and (depending on options) are lighter and have better brakes yet the lap times are very similar

...I agree on props to Ford (hell I might pursue a 302 in the future) but let's not forget...

5.0's are putting down anywhere from 375-395rwhp/360 torque
While Boss 302's have put down 410-415/355
Compared to an M3 340/250 range all on dynojet's.

These Coyote's have huge power/torque advantage and (depending on options) are lighter and have better brakes yet the lap times are very similar

Everything I've seen on the Mustang GT motor shows over 370 HP and less than 380, while in a minor quibble, I'd adjust your M3 figures to 340-360 HP, based on what I've seen and read.

The Mustangs are slightly heavier, typically somewhere close to 3660 or so compared to around 3600 for the bimmer.

As far as brakes are concerned, the Ford is only "better" in the sense that fade is not typically an issue, but overall braking superiority in a single lap might well go to the M3.

In my opinion, the M3 has an overall superior chassis compared with the Mustang, and when you combine that with better weight distribution and a more sophisticated posi, the M3 will definitely have an advantage coming out of corners, as long as you're running well into the right side of the tach. Single-lap braking might also show an M3 advantage based on the aforementioned weight distribution.

All of this data comparison pretty much comes into the "so what" area in my opinion. The point is, a Mustang GT is pretty close to an M3, performance-wise, which is worthy of kudos for Ford.

The Boss 302 LS? Definitely a better performer than the M3, but hell, it's a race car made street legal, and really shouldn't be compared to the M3 - except Ford said the M3 was their target car at Laguna Seca. Therefore, comparisons are inevitable, if mildly ridiculous.

The Boss 302 LS? Definitely a better performer than the M3, but hell, it's a race car made street legal, and really shouldn't be compared to the M3 - except Ford said the M3 was their target car at Laguna Seca. Therefore, comparisons are inevitable, if mildly ridiculous.

Bruce

Why wouldn't they be compared? Similarly priced. Both performance cars. Just because one is more "hard core" than the other doesn't mean they shouldn't be compared IMO. One might be a better track/performance car and the other a better DD. Both are built for track duty, are driveable on the street and similar in price.

Bruce nailed this to a tee...I mean like an M4 with a ACOG at 200M...just tack driver.

Tech I normally agree with you and I understand this is all opinion but I love the Mustang. The only thing I found lacking is the interior, its put together well but the feel isn't quite there and the door panel materials are a joke.

What you all have to understand this car was designed by the "old" Ford, what I call the pre Alan Mullaly days. Yes it has been updated and such but the real Mustang has yet to arrive. Has anyone sat in a new Focus? This is a budget car for Ford and I can't wait to see what Ford has installed for the next Mustang. With BMW going to FI V6/I6 for the F3X M3s I see a Mustang in my future or really reach and get back into a 911 ala 991S as I am a normally aspirated car guy.

As far as the current car I like the design, it is looking old in the tooth to me but it is still a good looking car. I am just not into the retro thing.

As far as the commercial..man that girl in the beginning of the video is so hot!! I hope my wife doesn't read this..

Something else Bruce brought up regarding chassis dyno's. The day my E92 M3 dyno'd at 346rwhp a brand new Mustang GT fresh from South Bay Ford was bolted up and ran a 368rwhp, the car only had 200 miles on the clock, I'm sure there was another 10+ after break-in.

[quote=tibra1;11801329]Does anyone care about styling and design... or is performance the bottom line..the car still looks lunky and unsure of itself and the lines suck[quote]

Tibra, you have to always keep in mind that what you post is "your opinion" its not fact. You may feel the car looks lunky and unsure but a lot of us, in fact I would wager a good amount of us don't feel that way, well especially of the hundred of thousands of 05-13 Mustang owners out there. The Ford Mustang has the largest brand loyalty of any other car make in case you didn't know that.

Also, the 2013 is just a freshening of an older style. The next Mustang out in 2014 for the 50th anniversary of the Mustang will be all new with a more "world" approach to the car yet still be a Mustang with an IRS and still having the Coyote V8. This car is going to be a winner...well hoping anyway.

Why wouldn't they be compared? Similarly priced. Both performance cars. Just because one is more "hard core" than the other doesn't mean they shouldn't be compared IMO. One might be a better track/performance car and the other a better DD. Both are built for track duty, are driveable on the street and similar in price.

Probably shouldn't have said "...shouldn't be compared...". Should've said something more like "They are not direct competitors..." or somesuch.

One is a two-seater, somewhat raucus and rough-riding, built to run on track but street-legal (except for the front spoiler), while the other is a four-seater, built to be more of a high-performance luxury GT but still comfy on track except for the brakes.

Of course, they are not "similarly priced", either. The Ford is $48K, while average price for an M3 is well into the $60s.

As I said, the primary reason the two cars get routinely compared is that Ford said the M3 was their target at Laguna Seca - after having already beaten up on the M3 at said track, of course.